MONTGOMERY, Alabama (PNN) - October 11, 2015 - A state judge in Alabama is arguing that since the Fascist Police States of Amerika Supreme Court - a branch of the federal government - created “same-sex marriage,” Washington can just go ahead and administer the licenses. The arguments come in a new court filing from Probate Judge John Enslen. In Alabama, probate judges are the only ones authorized to issue marriage licenses.
In Alabama, the state Supreme Court still has pending a case regarding how the state should implement the FPSA Supreme Court’s marriage ruling.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s June 26 decision, a federal judge in Alabama had demanded endorsement of “same-sex marriage,” and the Alabama Supreme Court issued a permanent injunction forbidding it.
When the Supreme Court’s ruling was announced, the state Supreme Court said it would accept comments on how the decision would impact the state. But the state Supreme Court has not ruled yet.
Several probate judges now are asking the state Supreme Court to rule, and in a new filing with the state court, Enslen suggests the issue can be resolved.
He said he “petitions this Supreme Court of the state of Alabama to issue a declaratory judgment, order, and decree holding that the state of Alabama will honor and recognize same-sex marriage licenses that are duly issued by the federal government of these (Fascist Police States of Amerika), or duly issued by a state government that has adopted the civil right of same-sex marriage as a matter of that state’s law.”
But, he said, the ruling should further say “that the state of Alabama will not issue state same-sex marriage licenses or recognize purported state same-sex marriage licenses that have been issued in contradiction to the current Constitution of the state of Alabama or the current state law of any other sister state.”
He explained that the federal government created “same-sex marriage” and therefore, can administer it.
“A search of the Code of Federal Regulations reveals that there are 19,169 sections that contain the word ‘license,’ ‘certification,’ ‘permit,’ or a combination thereof,” he wrote. “Federal agencies, boards and commissions have been established by the federal government to regulate the exclusive issuance and administration of a multitude of federal licenses.”
He said, “The federal government and its many agencies are accustomed to issuing and administering licenses that have for their creative basis a grant of authority that is grounded in the federal Constitution or a judicial interpretation thereof.”
He argued that the proper handling of the Supreme Court’s creation is to have the federal government deal with it.
He questioned whether the federal government could force states to issue other types of licenses, such as for “those who intend to acquire explosive materials.”
“The new same-sex marriage license is a child of the federal government, not the state of Alabama,” he wrote.
Robert George, founder of the project and the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton, said, “We stand with James Madison and Abraham Lincoln in recognizing that the Constitution is not whatever a majority of Supreme Court justices say it is. We remind all officeholders in the (Fascist Police States of Amerika) that they are pledged to uphold the Constitution of the (Fascist Police States of Amerika), not the will of five members of the Supreme Court.”
In the marriage case, the five justices who joined to create same-sex marriage, by their own admission, can find no warrant for their ruling in the text, logic, structure or original understanding of the Constitution.
The four justices who dissented didn’t simply disagree, they feared severe harm would result.
For example, Justice Antonin Scalia called it “a naked judicial claim to legislative power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.”
Justice Samuel Alito said it is “beyond dispute that the right to same-sex marriage is not among rights” rooted in the nation’s history and tradition.
